• Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

Comments (5)

1 localhost commented Permalink

I am probably reading more into the scope of this than I should ... but can one of the designated healthcare and education standards groups leverage ANY of the current or future IBM patents without challenge from IBM or can they only leverage certain SUBSETS of our patents ?

2 localhost commented Permalink

What we have done is focus this on software interoperability standards in healthcare and education. So we're talking software patents, not hardware. We're also describing the scope of the selected groups, so that we can't have the "electronic healthcare working group" become the "electronic healthcare and semiconductor modeling algorithm working group." This is a silly example, but you see my point. So the subsetting is by virtue of the space they will standardize within, not some other type of thing. The pledge lays out the rules: if they stay within those and we agree, they'll be just fine.

3 localhost commented Permalink

OK good ... so as long as the patent in question is a software patent and its use makes sense within the purview of a particular designated healthcare and education standards group then that group is OK leveraging it. Would that be correct ?Thanks.

4 localhost commented Permalink

yes, that's the idea, but remember that the criteria laid out in the documents at http://www.ibm.com/research/innovation/ip are the official rules to follow. Once the resulting healthcare and education standards meet the criteria and we add them to the list, the pledge applies to them.

5 localhost commented Permalink

This is my first entry as a blog reader. You likely are aware of this, but IBM research developed a novel code base for a clinical application for a very large HMO that eventually became one of the world's largest electronic health record systems installed. Scalable to 60k users across 10 States, 4 tiered, C++ fat client. I lead that effort as the PE and there were 200+ IBMers that were involved with that project.There is no industry I am aware of more broken than Healthcare and no industry more resistant to change. While some coding standards exist for types of "transactions" (ICD9, CPT) and to some extent transaction messaging (HL-7), there are so many adaptations of the standards they become organization specific and result in a tower of babble, even with sophisticated message translators. Unfortunately, the industry in unable to have a successful call to action and the government's attempts have just created a veneer of bureaucracy that is hollow underneath. It will take a consortium of providers, payers, consumers and government agencies to push/pull/cajole this into effect. Technology can definitely enable the necessary [disruptive] change and there is no doubt change is needed (100k easily preventable deaths a year in the US is just cause). How could something that appears so easy be this elusively hard? I do understand this approach is different than attempts in the past and the future is promising.So I endorse and salute these efforts and wanted to let you know you have hundreds of colleagues spread across IBM that have some level of ability to help if you need it. I just wanted you to be aware of that.

Add a Comment Add a Comment